i think PTGui's blending is OK and not more. Autopano Pro supports HDR output which means 32-bit. however, it doesn't do what i think is reasonable on rendering from RAW files. it uses sRGB. i haven't tested 2.0 for honoring profiles and propogating them when stitching from TIFF.
I've been too busy to really give APP 2.0 a workout, but the few images that I tossed at it did seem to process faster than the earlier APP version. Version 2.0 seems to handle large files well (60.5 MP) where the earlier version worked but seemed to chug along slower.
I would be interested in hearing your findings on using AAP 2.0....
on my machine, APP 2 gives me an invalid bitmap error when it starts to render a 300 megapixel RAW stitch. my next largest render so far has only been about 60 megapixels and that worked fine. ended up stitching using APP 2 and then rendering with APP 1.4.2.
HerbChong wrote:
i think PTGui's blending is OK and not more. Autopano Pro supports HDR output which means 32-bit. however, it doesn't do what i think is reasonable on rendering from RAW files. it uses sRGB. i haven't tested 2.0 for honoring profiles and propogating them when stitching from TIFF.
Herb...
PTGui gives you at least 3 different blending engines to choose from if you install the plugins - smartblend and enblend + PTGui. It also supports HDR output and is profile aware AFAIK. Autopano and PTgui both have their fanbois but either is equaly capable with the right knowledge to use them.
HerbChong wrote:
on my machine, APP 2 gives me an invalid bitmap error when it starts to render a 300 megapixel RAW stitch. my next largest render so far has only been about 60 megapixels and that worked fine. ended up stitching using APP 2 and then rendering with APP 1.4.2.
Herb...
I don't want to bounce around between the two versions---so am hoping APP 2 can handle it all well. Speed wise processing is much improved. The main consideration is ability to handle large files, as I am am talking very large------the ability to handle anywhere from 3 to 12 images taken with a 60 megapixel medium format back. And this may also be why CS3 poo-poo'ed me and APP 1.4 worked.
my complaints with PTGui have always centered on the basic stitching. i haven't tried in a year or so now and i don't feel a need to.
Herb...
shirozina wrote:
PTGui gives you at least 3 different blending engines to choose from if you install the plugins - smartblend and enblend + PTGui. It also supports HDR output and is profile aware AFAIK. Autopano and PTgui both have their fanbois but either is equaly capable with the right knowledge to use them.
i shot a level panorama on a pano base and had it automatically stitch. it came back with a wavy horizon. several other programs i tried have done that. i own about a dozen panorama stitching programs and once Autopano Pro came out, i stopped using the rest. PTGui never went onto my bought list. every time i tried it, there was something that was annoying about it that my main programs did better.
Autopano Pro is the only program i have used where i don't tell it anything except which images belong in a panorama and it gets it right for a very large fraction of my stitches. by changing how many control points it automatically uses and how hard it looks for control point matches, i can stitch every panorama i have tried without ever editing control points manually like i have had to do with every other program at some point.
jhelms wrote:
If you want to mess around with a free/easy program in the meantime you can download Microsoft I.C.E., it will do tiled panoramas and the auto setting is pretty cool when starting out.
Anyone else tried using this? I keep being pleasantly surprised at the results from it, especially since it's free...
jhelms wrote:
If you want to mess around with a free/easy program in the meantime you can download Microsoft I.C.E., it will do tiled panoramas and the auto setting is pretty cool when starting out.
Anyone else tried using this? I keep being pleasantly surprised at the results from it, especially since it's free...
Sure did compared it to results I was able to get from Panorama tools via Ptassembler GUI. And result I was able to get automaticly with a trial version of Aoropano Pro. Here are the resuluing images make up yourown mind.
Mr Mouse wrote:
Sure did compared it to results I was able to get from Panorama tools via Ptassembler GUI. And result I was able to get automaticly with a trial version of Aoropano Pro. Here are the resuluing images make up yourown mind.
Panorama Tools PTassembler
Autopano Pro
Photoshop CS3 Photomerge results I don't have CS4
Microsoft ICE
What were your settings in MS ICE? I've only had one shot (out of maybe 50 panos that I've let it process) that it didn't stitch correctly.
This bathroom was VERY 'shallow' / skinny, this stitch is from 23 shots:
Couple more tiled ones that MS ICE did using the automatic settings:
You did not try to stitch any 360 spherical panoramas taken with a fish-eye lens. With a fish-eye lens you only need to capture 5 images for the full 360 view. Most stitching software does not have support for fish-eye lenses. Microsoft ICE will fail every time you use is a fish-eye lens. Most do not try to do 360 panoramas with a normal wide angle lens because it would require somewhere near 30 images to be captured which takes a lot of time to position the camera. Things will change like lighting movement etc. 360 panorama are normally view with a special viewer example http://archive.bigben.id.au/victoria/virtual/vr/barmah.html
Mr Mouse wrote:
You did not try to stitch any 360 spherical panoramas taken with a fish-eye lens. With a fish-eye lens you only need to capture 5 images for the full 360 view. Most stitching software does not have support for fish-eye lenses. Microsoft ICE will fail every time you use is a fish-eye lens. Most do not try to do 360 panoramas with a normal wide angle lens because it would require somewhere near 30 images to be captured which takes a lot of time to position the camera. Things will change like lighting movement etc. 360 panorama are normally view with a special viewer example http://archive.bigben.id.au/victoria/virtual/vr/barmah.html...Show more →
Correct, I haven't tried any 360 / fisheyes with ICE.
I do put together some 360's using 2 images taken with a 183' lens mounted on a Nikon 5100 though (using a different program).
Seismo wrote:
Can't imagine anything would do a better job that PS CS4. I've done hand-held panos and the results with PS CS4 are absolutely amazing.
I do not have CS4 however CS3 Photomerge was not able to stitch 360 Spherical Panoramas when a Fish-eye lens was used. The best I was able to do with CS3 Photomerge http://www.mouseprints.net/old/dpr/PhotomergeCS3.png You need real stitching software for these like Panorama Tools or Autopano Pro. Photoshop Photomerge will stitch simple panoramas well as will FREE Microsoft ICE. $600+, Free or $120 for the best. Photoshop has a High price and is limited.
I can testify that APP is better than CS4. My CS4 fails with dark (sunrise the bottom half is dark the sky is light) panos and, of course, cannot run as fast as APP.
I've had good success with CS3 Photomerge. I did the colour balance and corrected for vignetting in LR, then exported to CS3. Here is the result of 5 photos with a 5D and 35L (which does distort a bit ... but still came out nice )
)